How ‘Daddy' Trump Learned to Love NATO
THE HAGUE—What a difference one night in a Dutch palace can make.
President Trump departed Washington early Tuesday in a bad mood, swearing at Israel and Iran for endangering the cease-fire he had brokered and sweating from a heat wave blanketing the capital.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
12 minutes ago
- Fox News
Minnesota faces federal lawsuit for offering illegal immigrants college tuition benefits denied to Americans
The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a complaint challenging laws in Minnesota that provide free and reduced in-state tuition to illegal aliens, claiming the laws are unconstitutional. Under federal law, higher education institutions are prohibited from providing benefits to illegal aliens not offered to U.S. citizens. According to the DOJ, Minnesota's laws unconstitutionally discriminate against U.S. citizens and are in direct conflict with federal law. "No state can be allowed to treat Americans like second-class citizens in their own country by offering financial benefits to illegal aliens," Attorney General Pam Bondi said. "The Department of Justice just won on this exact issue in Texas, and we look forward to taking this fight to Minnesota in order to protect the rights of American citizens first." By filing the lawsuit, the DOJ is demanding that Minnesota stop the enforcement of a law requiring public colleges and universities to provide in-state tuition rates and free tuition based on certain income circumstances to immigrants in the country illegally who maintain state residency. Federal law prohibits higher education facilities from providing education benefits to illegal immigrants, which are not offered to U.S. citizens. The lawsuit comes just weeks after the DOJ took actions against Texas for providing similar benefits to illegal immigrants. Both lawsuits have been filed in response to two executive orders signed by President Donald Trump since returning to the Oval Office in January. The executive orders were signed to ensure illegal immigrants cannot receive taxpayer benefits or preferential treatment. One of the orders, "Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders," ordered all agencies to "ensure, to the maximum extent permitted by law, that no taxpayer-funded benefits go to unqualified aliens." The other order, "Protecting American Communities From Criminal Aliens," directs officials to "take appropriate action to stop the enforcement of State and local laws, regulations, policies, and practices favoring aliens over any groups of American citizens that are unlawful, preempted by Federal law, or otherwise unenforceable, including State laws that provide in-State higher education tuition to aliens but not to out-of-State American citizens." Ultimately, Texas complied with the DOJ and stopped enforcing the Texas Dream Act, which was originally introduced in February 2001. The legislation, signed by Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, June 16, 2001, removed federal immigration status as a factor in determining eligibility to pay in-state tuition at Texas public colleges and universities for students who graduate from a Texas high school and who meet the minimum residency, academic and registration criteria. While the state immediately stopped enforcement, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has since intervened. On Tuesday, the ACLU of Texas, alongside organizations like the Texas Civil Rights Project and Democracy Forward, filed a motion to intervene in the litigation to defend the constitutionality of the Texas Dream Act against the DOJ. The ACLU said the DOJ's order was agreed to by Texas without proper process and creates "sweeping uncertainty" for students and colleges. "As students prepare to attend school in the fall, the failure of neither the DOJ nor the attorney general to defend the Texas Dream Act threatens their ability to afford tuition – and suddenly threatens their dreams of pursuing higher education," the ACLU said in a press release. "By moving to intervene, these groups and individuals hope to challenge this abusive litigation strategy and defend the Texas Dream Act, which has enabled a generation of Texans to grow their careers and become leaders in our communities." Fox News Digital has reached out to Gov. Greg Abbott's office for comment on the matter.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Europe's LNG Gamble Exposed by Middle East War
Oil and the security of its supply have stolen the media spotlight in the context of the new Middle East war, and with good reason. Ever since Israel first bombed Iran, diesel prices have soared, jet fuel prices have soared, and importers have been troubled. For Europe, the situation is even worse due to natural gas. Europe has been hurt more than others by the diesel price surge because it has boosted its imports considerably over the past years. About 20% of the diesel Europe consumes comes from imports, and a lot of these imports come from the Middle East. The situation is not much different in jet fuel. Europe depends on imports and a solid chunk of these imports comes from the Middle East. What's true of these essential fuels is doubly true of natural gas—even though direct imports of gas from the Middle East constitute a modest 10% of total imports. Yet they constitute a substantial portion of global gas exports, so any suggestion of disrupted supply affects gas prices in exactly the same way it has affected oil prices—and makes a vital commodity less affordable for Europeans. The latest import figures from the European Commission, for 2024, show that Norway was the EU's biggest supplier of natural gas via pipeline, and the United States was its biggest supplier of liquefied natural gas. Other large suppliers of LNG included—awkwardly—Russia, with 17.5% of the total inflows of LNG, and Algeria, with 10.7%. Qatar's share in EU LNG imports stood at 10.4%, largely because Qatar prefers to deal in long-term contracts, and European Union planners don' it is not these 10.4% that matter. It is the fact that around 20% of global LNG trade passes through the Strait of Hormuz and Iran threatened to close the waterway in response to Israeli and U.S. attacks. This prompted a jump in European natural gas prices by a fitting 20% per the Financial Times, which highlighted the dangers of import dependence in energy commodities. To be fair, the European leadership is aware of these dangers. They are one reason for many European leaders' near-obsession with the energy transition, on the assumption that wind and solar would be able to provide local energy—which is true—and that this energy can replace that provided by gas—which is not true. The latter was proven rather conclusively by the April 28 events in Spain, although it will be a while before the facts become accepted. In the meantime, Europe is in for more suffering, even if Iran doesn't close the Strait of Hormuz, which for the time being seems to have been taken off the table amid ceasefire efforts. The reason is that Europe needs to refill its gas storage caverns for next winter. Even if it cancels the 90% refill rate requirement, it still needs to buy a lot of gas, most of it on the spot market because of that aversion to long-term gas commitments it believes is part and parcel of the transition effort. And geopolitics has made LNG costlier—which will add billions to the refill bill. Earlier this year, it became clear that Europe's bill for natural gas would be higher this year than last because the winter of 2024-25 was colder and storage levels fell lower than in the previous two years. So, this year, Europe needs to buy more gas, adding some $11.2 billion to its total tab. But that was before the latest Middle Eastern war broke out. Now, the tab has gone further up—and Europe is already struggling with high energy costs, not least because of its dependence on LNG imports. Once again, then, Europe would need to rely on luck. If it is lucky, demand for liquefied natural gas from Asia will remain tepid, as it has been over the first half of the year. If it is lucky, the war between Israel and Iran will be over within the month, removing the supply disruption premium from LNG prices. If it is lucky, finally, winter 2025-26 will be as mild as winter 2023-24 and gas demand will be lower. Even if Europe gets lucky on all three, however, the cost of its energy will remain elevated compared to places such as China and the United States—its main business rivals. The reason is as simple as it is unpalatable for European political decision-makers: local supply. Both the U.S. and China are putting their local natural gas resources to good use. Europe isn't, although in all fairness, it doesn't have as much of an easily accessible gas resource abundance as either the U.S. or even China. The staunch refusal to develop any hydrocarbon resources locally, however, is as counterproductive as the refusal to make long-term LNG supply commitments. It is a refusal to acknowledge the reality of energy demand and supply. The sooner Europe gets over this, the better for energy supply security. By Irina Slav for More Top Reads From this article on
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The S&P 500 flirts with it's all-time high, oil futures rise 1.4% after Middle East ceasefire
The S&P 500 closed the day at 6,092, just 51 points off its all-time high of 6,144 from February. Oil prices recovered from, rising 1.4% today, as tensions in the Middle East settled. Across the board other macro issues from tariffs to the looming spending bill also sat in limbo, easing uncertainty for markets. Despite little change in the U.S. stocks on Wednesday, investors watched the markets closely. The S&P 500 closed the day just 51 points off from its all-time high closing price of 6,144 on February 19. The Dow Jones closed the day down about 106 points, but still higher than its mid-afternoon lows on Monday. Meanwhile, the tech-heavy Nasdaq finished up 0.3%, closing Tuesday at 19,974. It is also flirting with a return to its all-time high of 20,173 points from December 16, 2024. The fact U.S. equities are not just recovering from their April rout, but rebounding to the record highs they saw before President Donald Trump's tariff policies, indicates markets may have started readjusting to the era of increased uncertainty investors find themselves in. Overall levels of market uncertainty have declined compared to their peaks in the immediate aftermath of Trump's on-again, off-again tariff policy. (A point reiterated by Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell during congressional testimony on Tuesday). But market conditions have not returned to the humdrum routine that investors welcome. On the other hand, the many issues that could roil markets—from the Middle East, to the looming inflationary impacts of tariffs, to an unprecedented government spending bill—are in a holding pattern. Yes, they haven't been solved but neither have they worsened. The U.S. announced a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. Trump stopped removing and reinstituting tariffs on a daily basis like he had been just a few weeks ago. The U.S. and China appear to be working on a trade deal but, there is nothing concrete other than the removal of the more than 100% tariffs they'd placed on each other. The spending bill, which would send the deficit skyrocketing, is for now, mired in the sandpits of the American legislative branch. This week started with slumps in the equities market over fears the conflict in the Middle East would disrupt oil flows. But what a difference a couple of days can make. On Wednesday oil futures were up 1.4% after falling earlier this week. Stocks also saw a similar drop earlier this week. After Monday's initial shock, a muted and fairly surprising reaction followed, noted Jake Schurmeier, portfolio manager at Harbor Capital and a former member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York's Markets Group. 'The risk premium in markets lasted all of five hours,' Schurmeier told Fortune. 'I think the answer could be that markets are becoming more efficient in getting used to these geopolitical blips.' The ups and downs of the last few days pointed to a reactionary market, Schurmeier said. 'The broader point is we've become so short term,' he said. 'It all strikes me as very cynical and short-term thinking at this point.' With choppy markets, including in intraday trading, some investors keep an eye on the long game. Bob Robotti, president and chief investment officer of asset manager Robotti & Company, said he's focused on the structural risks facing the economy rather than short-term geopolitical volatility. For instance, several major forces are going to drive inflation higher, he said. Key inflationary pressures such as 'all the aspects of tariffs, changing supply chains, extra frictional costs' aren't temporary but represent fundamental shifts in how the global economy operates, Robotti said. He sees the outcome from those shifts resulting in permanently higher prices. 'If inflation is a persistent event and higher interest rates are required, that means lower multiples on everything in the investable world,' Robotti told Fortune. 'This is particularly concerning given the concentration of capital in growth assets and private equity that have benefited from the low-rate environment, making the entire system more vulnerable to an inflationary regime change.' This story was originally featured on
